Angela Merkel: Superwoman or laughing stock?

Opinion by Marc Bacon

“I teach you the Overman! Mankind is something to be overcome. What is the ape to a man? A laughing-stock, a thing of shame. And just so shall a man be to the Overman: a laughing-stock, a thing of shame.” Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Friedrich Nietzsche.

As Angela Merkel starts to assert her power in Europe, it is easy to draw a parallel with one of the most famous concepts in philosophy. Fellow German Friedrich Nietzsche’s doctrine of the ‘Übermensch’ or ‘overman’ or ‘super-person’ signifies the next stage of human evolution whereby a type of ‘Supreme Being’ will evolve from lesser mortals. So, how does Mrs Merkel match up to Nietzsche’s powerful and complex mythical creature? On one level she did show Germany’s ‘friendly, beautiful face’ to the world and pulled off a stunning victory in the popularity contest to become the world’s most compassionate person but already, we see the wheels falling away fast. How will history remember Angela Merkel: a strong leader, a superwoman or a laughing stock, a thing of shame?

A key element of Nietzsche’s ‘overman’ was the dualism of Apollo and Dionysus. In Greek mythology, Apollo and Dionysus are both sons of Zeus. Apollo is the god of order, reason and the rational, while Dionysus is the god of the emotions, instincts, the irrational and chaos. For Nietzsche, enlightenment occurs when tension is created by the interplay of these two deities. In the American political thriller TV series House of Cards, Raymond Tusk says pretty much the same thing: “Decisions based on emotion aren't decisions, at all. They're instincts. Which can be of value. The rational and the irrational complement each other. Individually they're far less powerful.” Back in the real world another gentleman named Tusk, the Council President Donald Tusk, had these wise words to say: “Compassion is one of the foundations of solidarity, but in order to be able to help others we ourselves must be pragmatic at the same time.” Tusk calls for reception centres to be "closer to conflict areas outside Europe, where refugee camps already exist". This is also David Cameron’s position, which would at least save Europe from the chaos that is spreading like wildfire across Greece, Germany, Austria, Hungry and now the Balkans. The humane and sensible response would be to stop encouraging desperate migrants to take the perilous trip to Europe and not play into the hands of unscrupulous people traffickers. The role of political leaders is to convert legitimate emotional reactions from the public into measured, effective, rational responses and not allow themselves to be carried away with the flow. Good decisions are made when both rational and emotional are combined. Clearly Cameron and Tusk have a more balanced and therefore a more enlightened viewpoint. As Nietzsche puts it: "One ought to hold on to one’s heart; for if one lets it go, one soon loses control of the head too."

Since the tragic images of drowned Syrian infant Aylan Kurdi went viral, there has been a huge outpouring of emotion across Europe, which is natural. Calls were made for EU leaders to help migrants and Germany and Sweden, as we have seen, were ready and primed to respond to this call. At first glance this appears to be more emotionally motivated than rational, although this isn’t the whole story. There is a strong rational argument for welcoming migrants to Germany when we consider the demographic time bomb. Germany has a declining birth rate and the working-age population is shrinking which means there are not enough workers to support the growing aging population. This problem, however, is unique to Germany and not a good starting point for European policy. The economic reality in most of Europe is a far cry from the rich, comfortable pastures of Germany. Whilst German companies find it difficult to recruit young workers, young workers from many other member states are struggling to find work, as this table indicates.

This is taken from the European Commission website, which asks the question: “What is the EU doing to tackle youth unemployment?” The answer to which is to create a rigid quota system that will bring in hundreds of thousands of immigrants over the coming years. German youth unemployment is just one third of the EU average and a mere 15% of Spain and Greece.

The collective compassionate response sought by Merkel demonstrates a complete lack of solidarity and zero appreciation of the current hardship endured by her neighbours. It is, indeed, a deep paradox that Merkel imposes harsh austerity measures then demands participation in a costly program to house and care for refugees. In many parts of the EU health and social services are already being pushed to breaking point. By imposing dangerous and ruinous policies on her neighbours Merkel departs from the ‘ubermensch’ and cannot avoid accusations of bare faced hypocrisy. Many find her preaching for ‘Good Europeans’ with a lack of ‘self-interest’ a bitter pill to swallow, at this point in time. What's good for Germany is not necessarily good for other member states.

Merkel’s decision, it transpires, was both rationally and emotionally inspired yet it fails on both levels. It is cruel rather than compassionate and painfully lacking in clarity and common sense. Merkel's scattered thinking only serves as an example of Voltaire's observation: 'common sense is not so common.' The cold hard fact is most countries in Europe do not posses the resources or infrastructure to accept refugees on a scale anywhere near the level needed to make a meaningful impact. It is indeed a cruel gest to give hope to millions of distressed victims of conflict, when at best only a select few will be allowed to stay in Europe. There are four million refugees from Syria alone, an estimated 20 million worldwide and countless millions of economic migrants. Europe cannot bear 'toute la misère du monde'. Rather than deliberating on the symptom a strong European leader would be working with the international community to solve the underlying problem and bring some form of peace and stability to Syria. The situation is deteriorating on a daily basis and mixed messages from Germany as to whether or not its borders are open and trains are running is creating mayhem in neighbouring countries. The Schengen agreement is now in tatters. Razor wire, tear gas, water cannon and tanks are now a part of Hungary’s border control. This has sparked a bitter war of words with Croatia and Serbia. Tension is ratcheting up and no one can predict where this will lead. Refugees are left scrambling around the Balkans, a region scattered with mine fields from previous conflicts.

Merkel’s unprecedented unilateral decision to welcome unregistered refugees is also a boon for Isis. If she is expecting the sweet smell of desert orchids to rise up from the streets of Germany in the near future she may be in for a shock. There are snakes in the swarms. Let’s not forget it was Syria Hayat Boumeddiene, one of the world’s most wanted women, used as a safe haven to escape French justice. Her husband, Amédy Coulibaly, killed a policewoman then went on to gun down four Jewish men at a kosher supermarket in Paris. Isis has made clear their intention to send in terrorists disguised as refugees. Given the irresponsible, chaotic mode of migrant entry into Germany it seems only a matter of time before Germany will experience the same pain as France, Spain, England, Denmark and the US. Let us not forget that the biggest refugee crisis since World War II is set against a backdrop of jihadist terrorism; the biggest security threat Europe has faced since World War II.

Nietzsche was an extreme realist who believed that by embracing the realities of the world in which we live over the many forms of idealism we can lead authentic lives: “Sometimes people don't want to hear the truth because they don't want their illusions destroyed.” If Merkel is to rule the roost in Europe, as it seems is her intention, she may have to abandon some illusions, adopt a more realistic approach, listen more and preach less. The root of the problem, as always, is the idealist sweeping vision of Europe. That there must, for some obscure reason, be a single unified European position on everything. Homogeneity at any cost whether it fits with reality or not. Great relationships are forged by appreciating similarities and respecting differences. To cope with their own specific problems member states need freedom and flexibility not tighter integration, quotas and binding rules. A small truth is worth more than a big lie. Merkel’s wish to welcome unregistered migrants could well be remembered as the worst decision in the history of the European Union. At the moment, Merkel looks more like a laughing stock than a ‘super-woman’ insisting on ‘more Europe not less Europe’ when in reality the reverse is true.

All eyes will be focussed on the emergency summit on Wednesday 23 September. Will Merkel take a more pragmatic approach and heed the wisdom of Tusk and Cameron? A chilling statement from Germany’s Foreign Secretary, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, suggests otherwise: “If there is no other way, then we should seriously consider to use the instrument of a qualified majority.” An alternative to this highhanded stance would be to take responsibility for this fiasco and fall back to the Cameron, Tusk position. Will common sense prevail? Or will Europe be thrown into further chaos and strife? Only time will tell.

Share this article: